Are There Any Stable Cloud Hosting Options To Replace Dedicated Server?
Oct 4, 2008
I've got a dedicated server through Liquid Web. I can't say enough about how great the reliability and service has been since I switched over to them a number of months ago.
Nevertheless, with the advent of cloud hosting, I'm intrigued by the idea of paying for what I actually use on a server rather than having way more capacity than I need 90% of the day.
I've looked around here and there's a bit of talk about it but it doesn't seem like folks are scrambling into it and it also appears that the offereings are still relatively immature.
I really don't have the time to devote to tweaking, etc or figuring out something really complicated.
I'll stick to my dedicated server if it means tons of extra work or potential downtime or massive frustration but I wanted to get some feedback from the community about whether or not there are some stable cloud hosting options that are emerging that might be worth considering.
I currently rent a dedicated server from HiVelcity, and I'm very unhappy with it (unstable as hell, faulty hardware, etc.)
I am about to launch a new web application running on LAMP (P=PHP, i.e. Symfony)... And I'm expecting some heavy traffic on release day... I already know my current server can't survive being Dugg (been on the homepage several times), and was wondering maybe I should consider the so-called cloud hosting services being offered... Or just go with a new more powerful dedicated server.
What do you guys think would be best for a PHP+MySQL heavy site that is expecting a rush of traffic?
Also, if I choose something like (mt)Grid-Service, or Mosso, do I sacrifice future customizability (e.g. Sphinx, MemCache)? I have to say the ease of use is tempting for a non-linux guy like me, but I don't want to be constrained in the future because of current choices.
I'm planning on launching a php-based web application within a month or two and am weighing different hosting options. I was almost certain with my plan to use two dedicated servers (one for web, one for db) but I can't help reading about all of these new grid/cloud/utility hosting solutions that promise instant scalability and deployment - which sounds like a blessing. I know there is a lot of garbage and marketing hype so I felt I should ask what the real deal is. Are these services reliable, worth using, really that easy to use, powerful, etc? I was looking at gogrid's demo videos and to instantly launch a few web servers, a db server, load balancer, etc, in 15 minutes for 30% of the cost - I can't ignore it.
Have been snooping on these forums for a while and doing my research but now I need some advice. Hope you can help...
I currently have a dedicated server with 1&1 hosted in Germany and running 15-20 small company/friend websites. Whilst I have been reasonably happy with 1&1 (mainly down to their dashboard and reboot/restore/serial console functionality and prices), it's time for an upgrade. I am also looking to move back to the UK in order to get a UK based IP and slightly reduced latency, I understand I will have to pay a little more for the luxury!
I'm looking at a dedicated server with the following specs:
- Single Dual/Quad Core Processor - Min 2GB RAM - Min 2 x 160GB HDD + Hardware RAID 1 - 2TB data/month should be OK - CentOS 5 (other *nix?) - Plesk (cPanel?) - 10GB NAS Backup - Remote Reboot Port
Budget is around £100/month. At the moment it's between UK2, WebFusion, UK Servers, Poundhost, RapidSwitch and 34sp. I need to get quotes from DediPower, UK Fast & UK Dedicated...
The other main option is to buy a reasonably-specced Dell PowerEdge R200 (or equivalent?) and colo it. A machine with Quad Core Intel Xeon X3320, 2.5GHz, 2x3MB Cache, 1333MHz FSB, 2GB RAM, 2 x 250GB HDD, RAID 1 would cost about £700. Add colo from RapidSwitch and a Plesk license and the total is around the same as the best dedi offer.
Would welcome your thoughts on the benefits and pit-falls of renting vs. buying and recommendations for each based on my preferences. At the moment I'm swaying towards the buy and colo option as costs in year two will me much lower and I can resell/upgrade the hardware, but perhaps I'm missing something...
we are about to launch the public version of our website, and we are having trouble deciding which type of server to start with. We've reading a lot and contacting all providers to get a quote, but we haven't been able to take a decision. Maybe somebody with more experience can help us...
- most of our users are going to be (for the time being) in Spain. We plan to move to other markets in the future, but not before one year.
- we understand that the server location (or it's IP address) is important in terms of SEO, that's why we've been looking into spanish providers or providers that offer spanish IPs. This SEO thing is the main reason we have ignored Amazon ec2, which, on the paper, seems to be a very good option for websites that expect to increase their traffic rapidly.
- we are going to start with very few users, but we expect to be in >5000 users/day very soon. Hopefully, we will keep a steady growth for the next months, but this is something we can't anticipate for sure.
- our website is based on PHP&MySQL. Each user consumes quite a lot of memory, and queries to the database are very frequent and quite heavy in processing. On the local version (iMac - 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo - 2GB RAM), a typical query from a single user takes around 2 seconds. We still have to do some optimization, but there is not much room for it left...
- our budget is 150-200 Euro/Month, but we would be able to increase it in case we find out it is needed in order to have a decent website.
- we are no experts in Linux sys-admin, but we can do the basic stuff, such as installing, configuring Apache, etc.
Therefore, we need 'something' that is powerfull enough to satisfy our users and that is easily&transparently scalable in case we have a sudden increase of users. From our readings on this forum and others, we understand that VPSs are not powerfull enough for us. On the other hand, dedicated servers are not easy to adapt to an increase in the number of users. Finally, in Spain we have found that Arsys is offering what they call 'cloud server', which looks similar to Amazon's ec2. We haven't been able to find any objective review on this Arsys offering, so we don't know how good it is. Anyone has worked with this system?
have a number of vps servers with USA based VPS hosts, very happy with these companies but as they are USA based load time could be improved with AU based server. Also search engine considerations as well fictate we need to offer AU based hsoting. So now looking to setup future accounts a little closer to home with australian based vps hosting
Does anyone know of a really good, fast, reliable affordable vps host offering cpanel/whm vps hosting in a top notch australian data centre.
hoping to pay arounf $100 per month, with room to grow when we have more clients on the server...
This is the average package we are on with us based hosts so looking for something as close as possible to this...
$89 Monthly $0 Setup 2 GB Burst RAM 512 MB Guaranteed RAM 20 GB Storage 500 GB Monthly Transfer 4 IP Addresses Unlimited Domains Unlimited User Accounts Cpanel/WHM
Minimum Server Specs Dual Xeon 3 GHz or Better 8 GB Registered ECC RAM U320 SCSI HD in Hardware RAID 10 Zero Downtime During Drive Failure Hot-Swap Drives and Fans Replaceable on the Fly Dual Gigabit Network Interfaces
If anyone can point me in the direction of some reputable companies id be very happy!
Yes i have searched the forum but cant really find mention of good australian based vps hosts.
Well haven't managed hosting on vps machines yes so I am wondering that how much this type of machine suit for running a hosting business ? Very honestly I think that people use vps for temporary bases and later they move to individual servers. I will appreciate your opinion.
I've just spent 20-odd minutes on the live chat to someone at SoftLayer to ask if there is any advantage using Cloud Servers over a VPS / Dedicated for a WHM/CPanel system. Unfortunately I didn't receive any answer other than "WHM would work in a Cloud server with certain types of OS only". Strange answer.
I have been very interested in Mosso for quite some time, though Cloud Sites didn't seem quite right for what I needed with the compute cycles they had. However, their fairly new Cloud Sites looks very interesting, and their sales people at least will have me believe load balancing with several server instances will be superior to my current dedicated server.
Right now I have a server with Liquid Web that costs me $424/mo and 4x Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz with 4GB of RAM. The average load on the server is anywhere from 30% at low times to 70-80% at peak times and memory usage is usually 20-50%. On average there are about 1000 mysql queries per second as the site is very ajax-intensive (hence Cloud Sites being way too expensive).
I don't really know the difference and technical side of all of this, I just program and do the business side of things, but I really like what Mosso has and am wondering if I would get a performance boost going with their Cloud Servers (Going with something like 8 server instances at 512mb RAM each @ only around $200/mo including bandwidth). Also, would I want to load balance all 8, or do something like 4 running the mysql and the other 4 serving the actual site?
I'm currently working for a company who are looking to migrate there current business system and also create an e-commerce website.
The company (Company A) who were doing the migration were also going to originally take care of the e-commerce side of things aswell, but after looking at the website solution they have now decided to give it to another company (Company B) to deal with. But seem to be sticking with the original company to do the business system migration.
Now this has created a bit of a problem with regards to the hosting side of things (amongst other things ). Originally this was all going to be hosted by Company A. This would keep it all nicely integrated. But now Company B are doing the e-commerce side of things it needs to somehow integrate with the business database.
And now for the question (about time i hear you ask ). Can you give me the pros and cons of the following scenarios:
Scenario A: We host both business system (database) and webservers onsite.
Scenario B: Company A hosts business (database) solution. We host webserver.
Scenario C: Company A hosts business (database) system. Company B hosts webserver.
I represent a small software development company out of Bellevue, WA. For the longest time we had our server (3U rack) based in Sunny Southern California. We were paying $150/m for 3mbit connection with six IPs. We use the server for work as well as hosting a gaming community. We'd host half-life 2 servers for friends and family for the longest time.
We began to go over our monthly bandwidth allocation limits late last year and had to shell out for the overage charges. Not a big deal. However, a good friend of one of my associates said he could get us free hosting up here in Seattle if we moved our machine.
I was skeptical, but he said he knew someone who was an employee at one of the major datacenters here in Seattle and that she could get us in as long as we hosted her website. We moved our box in November of 2006. It is now March 6, 2007, and we just received word that we've been had. I guess the employee at said datacenter broke some rules and as a result lost privilages to host her own private machine.
So, while she was busy leading us along, we were basically frozen as a small start-up company as our servers were offline and our ability to function without this machine online was greatly hindered.
So, today I was turned onto this website as a place to find answers to questions about hosting. Well, here's my question.
Does anyone know of anywhere in the Pacific Northwest and/or Northern California that provides affordable hosting and quality service? We're looking for rack space for our 3U server and a 3mbit connection. Ideally we'd like more bandwidth than this as 3mbit wasn't enough at our old location... however, considering the amount of loss we've taken during this disaster, we'll settle for anything. We also only need 1 IP, but more wouldn't be a bad thing.
The key word here is affordable. We are starving college kids and hosting is expensive.
We're quite desperate, so any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Again, we're looking for cheap/affordable hosting sollutions in the Pacific Northwest that meets the above requirements.
hosting company that will allow me to expand as much as I like in terms of RAM, Storage and Bandwidth without having to move from a dedicated server to another dedicated server each time.
I guess the answer is something like Amazons Web Services (AWS). However, I haven't heard great things about them, but I wanted to know what everyone thought of them and any other similar cloud services that is more affordable and reliable.
I'm trying to replace my Linux OS with Windows Server 2003, which I already have a license.
I'm talking about OVH Kimsufi XL.
Following support's instructions, I booted my dedicated with netboot, specific with vkvm option.
Then I specified an ftp location, (where there is my "totally working" .iso), and I started the virtual session.
After some mins, a java windows appears, and starts the vnc session.
After usual linux loading, it stops on this :
Code: VFS: Cannot open root device "801" or unknown-block(8,1) Please append a correct "root=" boot option; here are the available partitions: 0300 244198584 hda driver: ide-gd 0301 5245191 hda1 0302 238428687 hda2 0303 522112 hda3
Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(8,1)
Do website builders generally go with shared hosting or dedicated server? I mean, if they work on several websites would they get a dedicated server instead of shared? From what I understand through reading shared hosting is basically if you only have one website. So one with multiple websites would go with a dedicated server?
I use shared web hosting service to get my website online. I'm wondering how many people use dedicated servers or virtual private servers instead and pay from $20 to several hundreds of dollars? Will I face any big problem with shared web hosting package which makes me choose dedicated servers?